"What’s the dollar value of a starry-eyed idealist?" ( in DC Today?)

[KoKo]

Ken Silverstein writing in "Harpers" Mag pretty much points out that the chances of a "Mr. Smith" Coming to Washington are gone..

This needs to change....but will those caught in the system be able to change it and will those trying to get into the system have a chance? Not likely unless Progressives and others step up to the plate to get the money OUT of our elections and make rules for Lobbyists that will be fair but restricting. Pelosi has proposed some reforms on Lobbyists. Lets keep pushing!

-----------
I recall a remark made by Studs Terkel in 1980, about the liberal Republican John Anderson, who was running as an independent against Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter: “People are so tired of dealing with two-foot midgets, you give them someone two foot four and they start proclaiming him a giant.” In the unstinting and unanimous adulation of Barack Obama today, one wonders if a similar dynamic might be at work. If so, his is less a midgetry of character than one dictated by changing context. Gone are the days when, as in the 1970s, the U.S. Senate could comfortably house such men as Fred Harris (from Oklahoma, of all places), who called for the breakup of the oil, steel, and auto industries; as Wisconsin’s William Proxmire, who replaced Joe McCarthy in 1957 and survived into the 1980s, a crusader against big banks who neither spent nor raised campaign money; as South Dakota’s George McGovern, who favored huge cuts in defense spending and a guaranteed income for all Americans; as Frank Church of Idaho, who led important investigations into CIA and FBI abuses.

Today, money has all but wrung such dissent from the Senate. Campaigns have grown increasingly costly; in 2004 it took an average of more than $7 million to run for a Senate seat. As Carl Wagner, a Democratic political strategist who first came to Washington in 1970, remarked to me, the Senate today is a fundamentally different institution than it was then. “Senators were creatures of their states and reflected the cultures of their states,” he said. “Today they are creatures of the people who pay for their multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns. Representative democracy has largely been taken off the table. It’s reminiscent of the 1880s and 1890s, when senators were chosen by state legislatures who were owned by the railroads and the banks.” Accordingly, as corporate money has grown increasingly important to candidates, we have seen the rise of the smothering K Street culture and the revolving door that feeds it—not just lobbyists themselves but an entire interconnected world of campaign consultants, public-relations agencies, pollsters, and media strategists.

All of this has forged a political culture that is intrinsically hostile to reform. On condition of anonymity, one Washington lobbyist I spoke with was willing to point out the obvious: that big donors would not be helping out Obama if they didn’t see him as a “player.” The lobbyist added: “What’s the dollar value of a starry-eyed idealist?”


http://harpers.org/BarackObamaInc.html

[KoKo]

1. WaPo Reports: "Lobbyists Won't Like What Pelosi Has in Mind:"

Lobbyists Won't Like What Pelosi Has in Mind
By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
Monday, October 30, 2006; D01

In an attempt to slow the revolving door between the public and private sectors, Pelosi would deprive lawmakers-turned-lobbyists of a few of their congressional perks. She would eliminate the House rule that gives access to the House gym, the House floor and its cloak rooms to former members of Congress who are registered to lobby -- access that was temporarily taken away earlier this year.

Pelosi would also require House members and their aides to disclose to the House ethics committee whenever they are negotiating for jobs in the private sector. The disclosure would have to be made within three business days after the talks begin.

Because of the notorious Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska and other controversial pork barrel projects, reform-minded lawmakers have been pressing to make it more difficult to slip narrowly focused spending provisions into legislation. Taking up their cause, Pelosi would end the practice of adding such measures to bills after House-Senate negotiators have completed their work. She would also insist that bills be made available to the public at least 24 hours before they could be voted on by the full House; some types of bills would have to be available for three days.

In addition, Pelosi would broaden a rule change adopted by the House this year that would force lawmakers to disclose the sponsors of "earmarked" spending and tax measures -- and to reveal their details -- before the bills that contain them can become law.

The Pelosi bill would crack down on lobbyists directly by creating an Office of Public Integrity. The new agency, which would be overseen by the House inspector general, would audit and investigate lobbyists' periodic filings and refer any problems they find to the U.S. attorney's office. Currently there is little if any serious enforcement of lobbying-disclosure laws.

The Pelosi measure would also make it tougher for Congress to spend public money in ways that widen the budget deficit. She would bar the House from taking up major budget bills that increase the government's deficit, at least compared to the latest estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

Pelosi would even stop the Democrats from doing what Republicans did to help solidify their majority -- at least when it comes to dealing with lobbyists. Republican leaders pressured major lobbying offices and trade associations in town to hire former Republican staffers and lawmakers in senior positions. That effort, known as the K Street Project, was designed to increase the flow of campaign contributions to Republican candidates and causes.

Pelosi would specifically prohibit House members from using their official actions to influence any employment decisions "on the basis of partisan political affiliation."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900628_pf.html